|
A few quick comments on the 'short career' players:
Joe Gordon fought in WWII during what would have been his best seasons.
Don Newcombe got drafted for two years just as his career was about to commence. He was quite bitter about that, too. His career slide was made worse by drinking problems.
Oiva had injury problems that ended his career early.
Munson, of course, died in mid-career.
On the Santo-Boyer arguements, when they both played as regulars, the opinion of those watching the game at the time was that Ken Boyer was the better player. Boyer was usually the all-star in the early 1960's. When Santo was having his best stretch, the late 1960's, tony Perez and Richie (not yet Dick) Allen were the two top third basemen in the NL. I don't think Santo deserves the HOF, and neither does Joe Torre unless his manager achievements are added in. then he likely does. If your going to go for a third baseman, its got to be Richie Allen, even if he played a lot of 1B late in his career. Powerful hitter, far more dangerous than Santo or Boyer.
Coming from a team that won nothing and already has Banks and Williams in the HOF, I think Santo would be a terrible pick and is in no way deserving. There's a Mendoza line for batting average and there should be a Santo line for the HOF: You need to be better than he was to get in.
IMO, Vada Pinson is one of the most under-appreciated players of his time. Great CFer, Fast on the bases, power and average. He was great for the Reds. I always hoped the Yankees would trade for him, but they never did. No way will he get in though.
Bob Meusel--after facing Ruth and Gehrig, what pitcher wouldn't let down a little?
Joe Gordon and Mickey Lolich would get my votes. Lolich carried the Tigers in the '68 WS and for years after that. People did consider him the best LH pitcher for a short spell, and no one ever consiered Santo the best third baseman in baseball at any point in his career. There was always someone better.
|